Tracheostomy-related durable medical equipment: Insurance coverage, gaps, and barriers.

PURPOSE: Tracheostomy care is supply- and resource-intensive, and airway-related adverse events in community settings have high rates of readmission and mortality. Devices are often implicated in harm, but little is known about insurance coverage, gaps, and barriers to obtaining tracheostomy-related medically necessary durable medical equipment. We aimed to identify barriers patients may encounter in procuring tracheostomy-related durable medical equipment through insurance plan coverage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tracheostomy-related durable medical equipment provisions were evaluated across insurers, extracting data via structured telephone interviews and web-based searches. Each insurance company was contacted four times and queried iteratively regarding the range of coverage and co-pay policies. Outcome measures include call duration, consistency of explanation of benefits, and the number of transfers and disconnects. We also identified six qualitative themes from patient interviews. RESULTS: Tracheostomy-related durable medical equipment coverage was offered in some form by 98.1 % (53/54) of plans across 11 insurers studied. Co-pays or deductibles were required in 42.6 % (23/54). There was significant variability in out-of-pocket expenditures. Fixed co-pays ranged from $0-30, and floating co-pays ranged from 0 to 40 %. During phone interviews, mean call duration was 19 ± 10 min, with an average of 2 ± 1 transfers between agents. Repeated calls revealed high information variability (mean score 2.4 ± 1.5). Insurance sites proved challenging to navigate, scoring poorly on usability, literacy, and information quality. CONCLUSIONS: Several factors may limit access to potentially life-saving durable medical equipment for patients with tracheostomy. Barriers include out-of-pocket expenditures, lack of transparency on coverage, and low-quality information. Further research is necessary to evaluate patient outcomes.

Amplifying patient voices amid pandemic: Perspectives on tracheostomy care, communication, and connection.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate perspectives of patients, family members, caregivers (PFC), and healthcare professionals (HCP) on tracheostomy care during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The cross-sectional survey investigating barriers and facilitators to tracheostomy care was collaboratively developed by patients, family members, nurses, speech-language pathologists, respiratory care practitioners, physicians, and surgeons. The survey was distributed to the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative's learning community, and responses were analyzed. RESULTS: Survey respondents (n = 191) from 17 countries included individuals with a tracheostomy (85 [45 %]), families/caregivers (43 [22 %]), and diverse HCP (63 [33.0 %]). Overall, 94 % of respondents reported concern that patients with tracheostomy were at increased risk of critical illness from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19; 93 % reported fear or anxiety. With respect to prioritization of care, 38 % of PFC versus 16 % of HCP reported concern that patients with tracheostomies might not be valued or prioritized (p = 0.002). Respondents also differed in fear of contracting COVID-19 (69 % PFC vs. 49 % HCP group, p = 0.009); concern for hospitalization (55.5 % PFC vs. 27 % HCP, p < 0.001); access to medical personnel (34 % PFC vs. 14 % HCP, p = 0.005); and concern about canceled appointments (62 % PFC vs. 41 % HCP, p = 0.01). Respondents from both groups reported severe stress and fatigue, sleep deprivation, lack of breaks, and lack of support (70 % PFC vs. 65 % HCP, p = 0.54). Virtual telecare seldom met perceived needs. CONCLUSION: PFC with a tracheostomy perceived most risks more acutely than HCP in this global sample. Broad stakeholder engagement is necessary to achieve creative, patient-driven solutions to maintain connection, communication, and access for patients with a tracheostomy.